ChrisJones 7,975 Posted August 2, 2008 Report Share Posted August 2, 2008 I know the Soviet 5.45 x 39mm round was designed specifically to fragment to cause soft tissue damage, that much has been determined from paperwork that's been de-classified after the collapse of Communism. If they based it on the NATO round then surely they must share similar characteristics? Thing is why did they change from 7.62 to 5.56 in the first place? Quote Link to post
Deker 3,478 Posted August 2, 2008 Report Share Posted August 2, 2008 Bit off-topic, but I was under the impression that a wounded enemy combatant was better than a dead one, because some bugger had to do something about a wounded man, raher than just leaving the body till later. That's how I'd been schooled too. A dead soldier lies on the ground, collected when everything has finished. A wounded soldier screams in agony, demoralising his comrades and requiring two men to carry him away from the battle field. Doesn't the 5.56 round tumble as a product of it's design, when fired from assault rifles? Chris A little more on the RG5.56 UK Military round (although most round the world are very similar)! Nope...it would be desperately inaccurate if it did, what tends to happen is that on contact it can flip a bit and go in sideways due to the shape and balance of the bullet. It will depend on loads of things such as range, angle of contact and density of contact surface! With regards to injuring the "enemy"...well yes..in the allegedly civilised world we are happy to do this but the reality is a fallacy! If you get hit anywhere even a bit important with a 5.56 military round you are dead! Try telling your average soldier to shoot his target in the arm or leg in battle conditions!! The normal soldier will aim for the body mass. It's real life, "shoot him in the arm" only happens in the movies, your normal soldier shoots to stop, or the bugger keeps shooting back at you!! I refer of course to the normal SA80 user, there are specialist areas in the military! Quote Link to post
Deker 3,478 Posted August 2, 2008 Report Share Posted August 2, 2008 I know the Soviet 5.45 x 39mm round was designed specifically to fragment to cause soft tissue damage, that much has been determined from paperwork that's been de-classified after the collapse of Communism. If they based it on the NATO round then surely they must share similar characteristics? Thing is why did they change from 7.62 to 5.56 in the first place? It's based on the NATO round to the extent it is a 5.56mm high pressure round. Fragmenting, HP, SP etc is banned under the Geneva Convention for military warfare...doesn't stop countries using them of course. The reason for the change is cost, logistics and operational time/supply. The 5.56 is cheaper. More can be transported to where they are required in the given truck/plane, etc. The soldier can carry more personally and therefore remain a more effective battle machine before he needs re supplying! Quote Link to post
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.